Just wanted to add my $0.02 - I'm glad David wrote this - excellent job sir!
My comment is this (I think it might have already been mentioned, however I will re-iterate it): the document as is covers two audiences - those that are writing Kafka "drivers" and those that are writing clients that publish and consume to Kafka (using a "driver"). Most of the document is geared for the former, however there are some bits that are meant for or are useful also to the latter. I would like to suggest that we split the document up and address each audience separately. As great as it is that David wrote a lot of great information for the "driver" writers, the need for that will slowly decline, as the drivers slowly become more available and more stable (there's only so many languages in the world). On the other hand, people will be writing their own "clients" using the drivers far more often, so the latter audience will, assuming Kafka becomes wildly successful, increase in need. Beefing up this part of the document - by focusing on that audience, will be incredibly useful to new adopters. Incidentally, it might behoove us as a community to have strong language that separates these two activities. I used "driver" and "client" - I am not necessarily advocating for these terms but rather just that there is a need for terms that are distinct - it is important to separate the concepts using language/syntax so that people do not get confused. On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 7:27 AM, David Ormsbee <d...@datadoghq.com> wrote: > HI Jay, > > > 1. Would you be willing to add this to the kafka wiki so we could make > > this the official howto doc? > > Absolutely. > > > 2. It might be good to add a "how to contribute your client" section. > > This would be hard to write right now because we haven't given anyone > any > > guidelines for doing it. We have been pretty liberal in accepting > clients > > kind of proceeding on the "something is better than nothing" theory. > But > > this leads to clients of mixed quality and little documentation, as > you and > > Joe noted. I will break this into a separate thread to broaden the > > discussion. > > I'll be happy to add it as soon as we have consensus on what the > guidelines should be. > > Thank you. > > Dave >
